<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (3) TMI 275 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69451</link>
    <description>RBI prudential norms for NBFCs did not override the Income-tax Act, so interest on non-performing assets remained taxable on accrual basis under the mercantile system; the assessee could not invoke section 43D by implication. Depreciation linked to assets already deemed allowed under section 115J was disallowed, software acquisition was treated as capital expenditure, and the change from the sum-of-digits method to the internal rate of return method for hire-purchase income was rejected. Provision for NPAs and the alternative plea of deemed write-off were also denied because actual write-off was required. Sales-tax collected but not remitted was treated as a trading receipt, while higher depreciation on leased vehicles was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2024 09:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 275 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69451</link>
      <description>RBI prudential norms for NBFCs did not override the Income-tax Act, so interest on non-performing assets remained taxable on accrual basis under the mercantile system; the assessee could not invoke section 43D by implication. Depreciation linked to assets already deemed allowed under section 115J was disallowed, software acquisition was treated as capital expenditure, and the change from the sum-of-digits method to the internal rate of return method for hire-purchase income was rejected. Provision for NPAs and the alternative plea of deemed write-off were also denied because actual write-off was required. Sales-tax collected but not remitted was treated as a trading receipt, while higher depreciation on leased vehicles was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69451</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>